Investigating project sustainability: technology as a development object in a community-based project in Naryn, Kyrgyzstan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The imperative of project sustainability has become explicit policy within development. This is especially true for technology transfer: ‘development objects’ are to be used by prospective beneficiaries long after the project’s closure. We argue that the link between project sustainability, technology and ‘success’ requires deeper scrutiny. We investigate a community-based project in Naryn, Kyrgyzstan, which included the transfer of smartphones, weather stations and camera traps. Upon the project’s closure, we compare the stakeholders’ viewpoints regarding the future use of the equipment, showing how technological objects attract new actors into the project’s network, change its course and enhance its impact. We use actor-network theory to explain how development objects shape development processes by generating own networks and transforming social relations of power. We propose a dynamic view of sustainability as: (i) continuation of delivery of project’s goods and services, (ii) durability of the achieved changes and (iii) feasibility of independent growth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it